Hawkeye's Blog

I was troubled by a post that seemed misleading to me..I WAS going to make these points in the form of comments but it seems that THAT option has been removed..SO,, I chose to post instead..We’ll BEGIN with the comment below….

"Should Obama win the election should he be faced with this task he really doesn't have a chance of changing the political makeup of the court, but should McCain win he would have this advantage and that makes me wonder just what impact that kind of thing would have on us as a Nation."

WHERE does ANYONE get THIS Idea???

HOW can ANYONE POSSIBLY come to THIS assessment and conclusion???

There are FOUR FLAMMING LIBERAL Justices that Gave Terrorists’ UNPRECEDENTED Constitutional Rights,, Protections for Child Rapists and ALL voted to take your Second Amendment Rights AWAY while there were FOUR Stout American Conservative HEROS who OPPOSED the FIRST two Decisions and LOST and who,, in turn,, WON the third..And a Justice that LEANS to the LEFT ( Kennedy ) but realized that HE could have started an ARMED Revolution by voting against the Constitution and FOR the DC Gun Ban,, as he MOST likely WANTED to do.. The ONLY decision of these Liberals made that can Possibly be defended as POSSIBLY Constitutional is,, regrettably,, the one involving the Child Predator,, and even THAT can be argued either way..

So HOW can ANYONE say of the most LIBERAL person ( Obama ) in Congress,, "Should Obama win the election should he be faced with this task he really doesn't have a chance of changing the political makeup of the court ".???

Especially if there becomes ANOTHER vacancy on the Court other then Stevens and Ginsburg ..

And WHAT’S with THIS statement??

"I believe that there is a crucial need for a more balanced court if we expect there to be real justice applied to the cases "

The Supreme Court is NOT supposed to be Balanced.. it is not EVEN a FUNCTION of the Supreme Court to be Balanced.. It’s SUPPOSED to be CONSTITUTIONAL….PERIOD…

Also..Bear in mind that Supreme Courts are greatly INFLUENCED by the VERY NATURE of the cases brought before them and,, as was EVEN Mentioned in the Second Amendment decision above,, by the CLIMATE of the day....SO,, SHOULD Obama become President,, One can EXPECT an attempt to Further the Liberal Agenda by virtue of the LAWS that they pass and the CHALLENGES that they face through Judicial Review..

The FACT of the matter is that EITHER way,, There is an EQUAL likelyhood that the Makeup of the Supreme Court will be changed..THAT SEEMS UNAVOIDABLE….HOWEVER..As ALWAYS,, it is OUR decision to make,, come November,, exactly WHICH kind of Change is acceptable and which kind is NOT by deciding who it IS that WE trust to make the proper nominations..

And besides,,ALSO keep in mind,,

The CHANGE in makeup of the Supreme Court doesn’t necessarilly mean a CHANGE in the Constitution or the application of it..

Conservatives are dedicted to the Constitution AS IT IS WRITTEN while Liberals are dedicated to interpreting and reinventing the Constitution AS THEY WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE WRITTEN IT..

So,,While there is an equality to the prospect of change in the makeup of the Court the "impact that kind of thing would have on us as a Nation." Is FAR and Away MUCH Greater with a LIBERAL Court then it IS with a Conservative one…

( ANOTHER point to consider is that ONE of these Liberal Justices has made appearences on College Campuses and Cable TV News Programs and stated unabashedly that HE is NOT bound by the CONSTITUTION when Making HIS decisions..)

He has SPURNED the Constitution!!!!!

SO,, the question REALLY boils down to ONE Issue,,,

Is THIS the kind of Supreme Court that YOU really,, REALLY want????

"The reason we are a Republic instead of a true democracy is the fear of the founding fathers to trust the popular ( We the People ) sentiment of the time to be the law.. "

So,, according to THIS person,,, The Founding Fathers FEARED the Will of the People SO much that THEY set up OUR Government and the Constitution to PROTECT against the will of We the People....THAT’S how Liberals Justify the "Rule of Law"….

And below,,,,, is MY answer…

THIS is our enemy..THIS is the kind of thinking that LEADS to Tyranny..THIS is the Justification that ALL Tyrants have made throughout HISTORY to validate their Authority.. That WE the People simply CANNOT be trusted to DO the right thing.. And the "RULE of LAW" has ALWAYS been the means by which THEY Maintain and ENFORCE their Authority....

OUR Founding Fathers KNEW this from MANY Historical Examples that THEY studied when formulating OUR Constitution and OUR form of Government..The THING that the Founding Fathers feared MOST was a Dictatorship of the LAW..THAT has HISTORICALLY been the QUICKEST path to a Dictatorship..THAT’S why they set up the bill of RIGHTS,, to PROTECT WE the People against the "RULE of LAW" by Government..

The very FIRST words in the Bill of Rights are,," Congress shall make no law"..

It’s THERE for a reason..

The LAW is RULED by the Constitution and the CONSTITUTION is SUBJECT to the WILL of WE the PEOPLE..

The Liberals have empowered te Judiciary for the expressed purpose of getting things done that they KNEW damn well would NEVER pass Muster with the People..They have sought.. and to SOME extent,, succeeded in advancing their agenda through "Legislation from the Bench"..

OFTEN we HEAR how we MUST adhere to the DICTATES of the Supreme Court as in the case of abortion ,, for instance…Now,,THIS is NOT a critique against abortion but THAT decision has been in effect for some 35 years now and ALL we’ve been hearing during ALL that time,, FROM THE LEFT,,is the ABSOLUTE nature of the AUTHORITY of the Supreme Court AND their Decisions ..

NOW......PAY attention here to these Liberal Democrat Enclaves..PAY attention to these SAME Leftist who PREACHED the Sanctity of Judicial Fiats…Pay attention to Washington DC,,Chicago and all other areas that have been profoundly effected by this most recent SUPREME COURT decision..

YOU will see DEFIANCE of the Ruling..( ALREADY the Mayor of Chicago declares that THIS Ruling wil change NOTHING ) YOU will see attempts to IGNORE the Ruling.. YOU will see every attempt to CIRCUMVENT the Ruling but the LAST thing that you will see is,, and THIS only after the NRA nails them to a wall numerous times,, is OBEDIENCE to the Ruling..

The REAL assault on the Constitution continues while the Bushwhackers continue to Distract with THEIR Fantasy violations..

THIS fight is FAR from being OVER….

Bear in Mind,, The Liberals on THIS court have voted to give "Rights" to the enemies of America,, Protections to Child Rapists and have Voted to take your Second Amendment Rights away..TWO of them are scheduled to retire in the NEXT Presidential Term..

Whatever else you might say about McCain,, HE,, through his Supreme Court Nominations,, remains our BEST hope to finally turn this avalanche of Liberalism around before it burys the American People under it’s Socialist’s Boot,, and our Constitution right along WITH us..

The American public’s opinion of the invasion of Iraq has changed significantly since the years preceding the incursion..

An early 2007 ( BEFORE the SURGE ) USA Today/Gallup Poll indicated that 75% of Americans felt the U.S. did not make a mistake in sending troops to Iraq in March 2003…

However, according to the same poll retaken in April 2007, 58% of the participants stated that the initial attack was a mistake. ( So essentially we have TWO polls by the SAME pollster (( but with DIFFERENT People )) stating EXACT opposite things )…

In May, 2007, the New York Times and CBS News released similar results of a poll in which 61% of participants believed the U.S. "should have stayed out" of Iraq…

****************************************************

THOSE numbers supporting the war have consistantly risen SINCE the SUCCESSES of the Surge have become SOMEWHAT Public Knowlege..Interresting enough,, it SEEMS that the attempts to SLANDER Petreas had BACKFIRED for the Democrats..

HERE is just an example of some other polls taken about the War..I make NO claim that they are representative of what the American People want or think as THEY do..I make NO claims that they are EVEN representative of the AVERAGE poll..I JUST present them as a CAREFULLY chosen list to make my point..OTHERS can come up with other polls to make THEIR points and they can do it very easilly..

So WHY am I doing this??

WHAT is my POINT???

Bear with me..YOU SHALL SEE in a moment.....

***************************************************

February 2001

Seven months prior to the September 11 attacks a Gallup poll showed that 52% would favor an invasion of Iraq while 42% would oppose it.

January 2003

An early January 2003 poll showed rapidly decreasing support for an invasion, although there was still more public support than there was prior to the "Gulf War" a decade ago.

Approximately 2 out of 3 respondents wanted the government to wait ( WAIT,,NOT abandon Invasion plans ) for the UN inspections to end, and only 31% supported using military force immediately. Interestingly, this same poll showed that a majority of Americans believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but did not expect UN inspectors to find them.. ( SO one can reasonably conclude that those SAME 2 out of 3 who wanted to WAIT believed that War was inevitable and they were NOT opposed to it ONCE their conditions were met..…IMO…)

Some polls showed that Bush's 2003 State of the Union increased US support for the invasion, but other polls showed that it had little effect.

Most polls showed that support for the invasion, depending on how the question is phrased, was at between 55-65% (58% according to CNN/USA Today, 57% according to the LA Times, and 67% according to Fox"

****************************************************
**

Now,, I’m NOT a big fan of polls,, they are at their BEST when done HONESTLY but THAT is RARE,, They are at BEST merely an Indication of what’s going on in the hearts and minds of the American People and more OFTEN then NOT the CONCLUSIONS have proven themselves to be Totally and Completely unreliable..

The Polls themselves are SUBJECT to the biasness of the questions,, the SELECTION of those being Polled,, the motivation and agenda of the Pollster and OFTEN the carefully chosen News coming from the MSM..The CONCLUSIONS are Subject to interpretations which are ALSO based on these factors..And they CHANGE every DAY,,,OFTEN dramatically..

ONE can find a POLL whose interpreted conclusions support ANY position without a WHOLE lot of trouble..JUST as ONE can make ANY poll say whatever they want it to say by JUST asking the Questions JUST so..

They DID JUST that with the Illegal Invader Amnesty bill..They tried to CONVINCE us that 80% of ALL Americans SUPPORTED their Amnesty Bill based on a POLL that asked the simple question;;

"Are YOU against Immigration?" ( Presumably,,LEGAL or otherwise)

They EVEN knew the KINDS of people that would be opposed to their bill...

IGNORANT RACISTS…..

SO you SEE, trusting the POLL is merely a matter of HOW much you can Trust the POLLSTER..

However,, taken as a whole,,ONE may extrapolate SOME conclusions based on these samples…

There are MANY claims being made by SOME who are in NO position whatsoever to make their claims and present their opinions as FACT when it IS in Fact,, MERELY their opinions..

BUT despite their claims,,

There has NEVER been a TIME when the VAST majority of Americans were against the War on Terror and FEW times when Americans were against the War against SADDAM and of THOSE,, NEVER has that opposition risen to the level of 70 or 80 persent..

The VAST Majority of Americans have NEVER been opposed to EITHER the War against Terror OR the War against Saddam NOR have the Majority of Americans EVER had ANY trouble in telling the difference between the two…It SEEMS that ONLY those opposed to the War have THAT difficulty...And they are PERSISTANT in trying to CONFUSE the two...

Opinions Fluctuate between approval and disapproval based on a variety of factors.. ( Mostly on whether it’s GOOD News or Bad News coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan ) and SOMETIMES this has resulted in a temporary DIP below the 50% mark in the approval ratings but by FAR,,MORE Americans have CONSISTANTLY SUPPORTED the War over the long run then those who opposed it..

THEY don't like War..ONLY a MADMAN would WANT war but they ALSO see the necessity of this war and they NEVER forget WHO the enemy is despite the efforts of the left..They want to get out SURE,,, but as WINNERS,, NOT with our tails tucked between our legs..

Here’s another thing about these Polls,,ONE in Particular,,

PAY ATTENTION to THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT that I’m making here!!!!!!!

I found it interresting to NOTE,, for instance,, the Gallop poll of February of 2001 that shows,, QUITE CLEARLY,, that less then ONE month AFTER George W.Bush was inaugurated and SEVEN months BEFORE the attacks of 9/11,,

52% OF ALL AMERICANS WOULD FAVOR AN INVASION OF IRAQ…

Now LOOK,,YOU can question or EVEN debate the accuracy of the FIGURES of this Poll but you CANNOT question the TIMING or the SUBJECT of this Poll..

THIS seems to fly in the FACE of the WELL Publicized and incessantly repeated LIE that Ole George managed to CONVINCE a STUPID America to go for the Invasion of Iraq by associating it to the attacks of 9/11..

HOW could he have DONE this if that HADN’T EVEN HAPPENED YET???

So,,The BIG lie about George W. Bush's BIG lie is in Fact and QUITE clearly PROVEN by the very EXISTANCE of THIS poll,,,,,,a BIG LIE….

And ALL this talk about a "CONFUSED" America that you keep hearing about OVER and OVER again on thiese boards is LIKEWISE,,,,a BIG Lie...

So,,in conclusion,,the NEXT time you hear,,on these boards or anywhere else what it IS that these self-appointed spokesmen for ALL of America says is what the VAST Majority of Americans WANT or do NOT want,, Consider the SOURCE and consider THEIR source..It is MOST likely coming from SOME poll carefully calculated and manipulated to say EXACTLY that……

Tuesday, June 17, 2008 10:12 PM

© 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.

Extremist groups continue to actively seek nuclear weapons, a senior US official said Tuesday during a meeting in Spain of a US-Russian initiative to fight nuclear terrorism.

"Combating nuclear terrorism is especially important today," US Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Rood told a news conference.

"Regretably we continue to see indications in the United States from information we collect of the very terrorist groups we are most concerned about making concerted efforts to acquire nuclear capabilities with the express intent to use them against our peoples," he added.

Over 200 delegates from 56 nations, as well as the European Union and the International Atomic Energy Agency, are taking part in the three-day gathering which got underway in Madrid on Monday.

The meeting is the fourth of its kind since the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism was founded in 2006 by US President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin to reinforce control of nuclear facilities and materials in order to prevent such groups from accessing them.

It was formed amid heightened global concern over nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran.

The closed-door gathering in Madrid is aimed at "developing and consolidating an international work plan of a technical nature to improve the fight against nuclear terrorism," Spain's foreign ministry said in a statement.

The world's five leading nuclear powers -- the United States, Russia, China, Britian and France -- form the core of the initiative which now includes 73 member states.

Ireland, Malta, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are recent additions to initiative.

"Each year we see a considerable increase in membership of the initiative and that happens because there is an understanding that terrorism is a global, common threat that requires a global response," said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak.

Previous meetings of the group have been held in Morocco, Turkey and Kazakhstan."

For those who think that we are WASTING our TIME fighting the Terrorists over THERE…

Yeah,, LET’S bring the troops Home,,, they can HELP to clean up the Rubble….

Once again,, the decision to go into Iraq after Saddam is being Presented as a "BUSH ONLY" proposition..

HERE is a SMALL list of quotes by MANY WHO SUPPORTED/CALLED for that effort before Bush’s presidency,, AFTER Bush BECAME President and yes,, MANY,,,, EVEN after 9/11…

MANY of those listed ,, you will note,, are CURREBTLY critical of the SAME action that THEY called for UNDER the Clinton Administration..

 PRIOR to the Bush Administration

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

AFTER Bush came into office..

"This December will mark three years ( almost THREE years into the former Clinton Administration ) since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

I'm just a FIRM believer in the adage;

 "the WHOLE truth and NOTHING but the Truth..."

Democrats don’t HAVE to worry about cleaning up ANYTHING.. They LOVE this..They PLANNED for this…THEY MADE THIS.. They WORKED HARD for 8 YEARS for this VERY situation..And THEY made it HAPPEN…

ALREADY the LIBS. are paving the road to blame everything that the Democrats do ,, and do NOT do in the NEXT 4 to 8 years,, on BUSH…

That’s what this "WHY would anyone WANT to Inherit THIS" BS is ALL about..

Don’t take MY word for it..LISTEN to what the Democrats SAY,, LOOK at what they DO..

Pelosi rode the "Clean up Corruption" campaign slogan right INTO power almost TWO YEARS AGO..SHE Promised CHANGE.. SO far,, the ONLY CHANGE is the SUSPENSION of ALL Ethics Investegations of DEMOCRATS..THAT’S like LOWERING the Crime rate by FIRING all the Police,, Dismantling the Judicial System and threatening to SHOOT anyone who reports a crime..THEN saying "Voila',,, there’s NO crime.."

The FACT of the matter IS… NOW,, the Democrats THINK that THEY can get AWAY with anything in the White House,, ANYTHING.. And when the American People HOWL in Outrage,,,, they’ll just Blame it ALL on Bush..

They WANT to say that electing McCain ( Called the Maverick for a REASON ) is tatamount to a THIRD Bush term but the FACT of the matter IS that if Obama becomes the President you’ll hear the BUSH name as much as you hear it TODAY..IF not MORE…..

YOU bet your ASS the Democrats WANT this election…Fact IS,, with their Party FRACTURED and in disarray,, they CAN’T afford to LOSE it…

HOW do they DO these things??

HOW did THEY accomplish this situation after SO much work??

ONE needs ONLY look at the stats ( NOT the "Cut and Paste" manipulated numbers frequently shown on this site ) to realize that THAT which is a DISASTER under the Republicans is a mark of Success under the Democrats..These SAME so-called "Independent thinkers" who NEVER TAKE sides ( but are ALWAYS critical of Republicans while ALWAYS praising Democrats ) will Herald the Presidency of Jimmy Carter with his Double Digit Inflation,, Double Digit Unemployment rate and what was KNOWN and referred to as,, the "MISERY" Index,, and CLAIM that his Presidency was successful..THEN turn around and condemn THIS Presidency,, with FAR better numbers ALL around,, as the worst ever..…SAME thing with the Clinton Administration..THAT which is worthy of PRAISE under HIS administration is reason for accusations,, allegations and condemnation under ANY Republican let alone Bush..

It’s that good ole DOUBLE Standard again..WE see it in CORRUPTION ( Jefferson vrs. Cunningham ) Scandals ( Craig vrs. Frank,,Studds,,etc..) and Politics in General..

The Democrats,, IF they get into the White House will INCREASE every one of the indexes..

Unemplotment,, Illegal Invader INCREASES in Numbers and Benefits,, TAXES out the whazoo,, Inflation..

YOU name it…

For the FIRST time in a DECADE we will suffer a REAL recession/depression,, NOT a Faked one that the Bushwhackers are wailing about NOW just to get these thieves into office....And it'll be ALL Bush's Fault

THEY,, the Democrats and their Party of Compassion and Diversity will TREAT ALL of the American People as they HAVE their OWN Membership in this Primary season..

As if they DON’T matter.. As if they don’t COUNT. As IF they DON’T care and they will DO so because when it’s ALL said and done,,,,,it’s the ONLY thing about the Democrats that’s the TRUTH…But it'll STILL be ALL Bush'sFault..

 BE careful of the Change you VOTE for..DON’T jump from the frying pan into the FIRE..The Change you GET could very well BE a change for the WORST..They wanted change with Carter and they GOT it..

The result??

A Democrat President that EVERY poll indicates is the WORST one ever in ALL of History,, EVEN worse then the REPUBLICAN President involved in the worst scandal ever just FOUR years earlier.... Watergate..

VOTE for the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter ( ALONG with the leadership of Hamas,, Syria and Iran ) in the person of Barak Hussein Obama if you WANT to but for ME ONE term with a Terrorist Sympathizer is MORE then enough for an ENTIRE LIFETIME..

But remember ONE thing when you DO..Liberal Elements of the Supreme Court JUST yesterday ruled to give TERRORISTS captured in a TIME of WAR and FIGHTING against American Soldiers the SAME Constitutional rights as American Citizens..

The SAME rights AS that American Soldier,, the SAME rights as YOU and I… In FACT,, MORE rights then the captured NAZIs of WWII..

The GUY in the White House will be NOMINATING the NEXT Supreme Court Justice(s)..And a DEMOCRAT Congress will LIKELY Be there to CONFIRM them..

JUST REMEMBER THAT…

Please Bear WITH me here...

Here’s what gets me..You HAVE a Minister like Wright who REALLY DOES preach Racism and Hatred..

And LOOK,, I’m talking about indisputable,, undeniable,, indefensable EVERYBODY KNOWS it when they HEAR it RACIST Hatred..

The KIND of RACIST HATRED that should OFFEND each and EVRY American,, regardless of Race,, regardless of background,, regardless of creed.... I’d VENTURE to say that it would  have INDEED OFFENDED Martin Luther King..It CERTAINLY bore NO resemblence to ANY of HIS speeches of PEACE among ALL Men and Women of ALL colors,, NONE that I have heard anyway....

And WHAT happens???

The ENTIRE MSM spends weeks trying to TELL everybody that THEY didn’t HEAR what THEY know they heard..That WE ALL took it OUT of CONTEXT and IN FACT,, look how racist WE must be to get ALL that upset and worked up over it..They KEPT telling us this RIGHT up until WRIGHT himself shoved it UP their Backsides and made it IMPOSSIBLE for THEM to do ANYTHING other then Finally ADMIT the truth..So,, WHAT do THEY do NEXT??

They come up with EXCUSES for his Racism which as it turns out,, according to THEM,, isn’t really HIS Racism at ALL but MERELY the result of a LIFELONG exposure TO "White Racism"..It’s ALL our Fault..

And EVEN now,, we’re TOLD that despite the DESPICABLE nature of HIS Rhetoric,,WE have to put UP with it because,, after ALL,, it’s HIS right of FREE speech under the Constitution..

NOBODY’S calling for his arrest,, nor SHOULD they..

NOBODY’S calling for ORDINANCES to be passed to SHUT down the Church,, nor SHOULD they..

MUCH as it’s an AFFRONT to DECENT people of ALL races for this to be allowed to continue it STILL remains protected Free Speech under the Constitution..

In OTHER words,, LIKE it or NOT,, THEY have a RIGHT to BE Racists..They’ve EVEN imported ANOTHER Wright type Preacher,, THIS one WHITE,, to pick it up where Wright Left off,,abeit if ONLY to give OBAMA a PERFECT pretext to finally LEAVE the Church and NOT offend the Black Congregation..

So,, NOW,, WHAT do WE have going on today???

We have a Flag that IS,, at it’s WORST,, Controversial.. A FLAG that EVEN the MEDIA doesn’t SEEM to realize ISN’T EVEN the Flag that THEY think it is as has been pointed out by myself and MANY others on this site..Well,, We have THIS Flag being flown over a MEMORIAL to fallen Confederate Soldiers and,, LO and BEHOLD,, ALL hell breaks loose..

To SOME,, a PORTION of the population,, it’s a SYMBOL of EVERY Negative aspect of a region of a nation that ONCE allowed Slavery and THEY have EVERY right to FEEL that way..

To others,, it represents the SPIRIT of the South that HAPPENED to OWN Slaves but HEY,,, THAT isn’t the ONLY thing that SHOULD be remembered about the South..And Guess what?? THEY,, Likewise,,  have a RIGHT to THAT opinion..

To other’s, it represent a FREE rebellious spirit that WE ALL should be PROUD of while STILL others believe that that SAME rebellious spirit should be a lesson in SHAME..

MOST simply seem to believe that it represents a PRIDE in ONE’S OWN HOME,,as MUCH for what it IS today as for ANY other reason..

The THING of it IS,,

WHAT the Flag REALLY represents depends on WHO you talk to..It MEANS different things to Different people and I suspect,,it ALWAYS will..

SO,,,,WHAT’S the REACTION here..

We have the SAME MSM that approaches this story from a DECIDEDLY Different and Negative direction..

"oooOOOOoooo,,They’re back,, THOSE guys are back and they WANT to FLY that ugly Flag..THOSE IGNORANT BASTARDS..

HOW DARE THEY??"

Quite a CONTRAST to the portrayal of the cheering and applauding Congregation at the TRINITY Church..

We have the NAACP wanting to appeal to the members of the " Sons of Confederate Veterans" to THINK of the GOOD of the Community and TAKE the Flag down..

Now,,, I NEVER saw or HEARD of ANY group going to that Trinity Church to make Such an APPEAL..

We have the Fla. Chapter of the Anti-Defamation League DEMANDING that the Flag come down..

Correct me if I’M wrong but I don’t remember ANYBODY making DEMANDS on that church either and I’M SURE it would have made the NEWS..

And LAST but NOT least,, WE have a couple of Council Members,, SO far ALL I’ve seen are a couple of White Guilt Ridden Liberals doing this,, CLAMMERING for Laws and Ordinances to SHUT this exibit down,, to STAMP it OUT.. THEY HAVE TAKEN A VOW TO BURY THIS UNDER A PILE OF ORDINANCES..

AND,, They’re GOING to take it up at the NEXT meeting..NO concern for FREE speech here..NO Siree..

SO,,WHAT do WE conclude by making THIS comparison between these two SEPARATE but EQUAL situations..

As I said in My Previous Post..it is beginning to appear that to SOME people,, and THESE are people in positions of POWER,, the POWER to EFFECT our very Lives..The PEOPLE that DO effect our very lives..

ONLY Whites can BE Racist and ALL but Whites have the RIGHT of FREE Speech..

ONCE again Political Correctness TRUMPS the Constitution..

To ME,, SUCH people are FAR worse then ALL the REV.Wrights in the WHOLE WIDE WORLD put together...

There is a news story going on ALL morning over here in Tampa..It concerns a plan for the " Sons of Confederate Veterans" to FLY a massive "Confederate Flag" ,, ON PRIVATE PROPERTY,, at the intersection of I-4 and I-75…EVEN the NEWS personel seem to be upset over this with ONE actually posting a BLOG calling for LAWS and REGULATIONS to put a stop to it.. I FIND it facinating that this SELF-proclaimed "EXPERT" on ALL things having to do with the civil war doesn’t SEEM even to KNOW that the Flag in Question ISN’T the "Flag of the Confederacy" at ALL…It IS,, instead,, the Confederate NAVAL Jack..IF it were a SQUARE Flag instead of being rectangular,, it would be ONE of over 100 Confederate BATTLE Flags..The Flags of the Confederacy,, of which there were 3,, look very little like the common conception of the flag in question..

I’ve heard this SAME mistatement of fact on the TELEVISED broadcasts going on ALL morning ..

Now I KNOW that THIS seems to be splitting hairs but ONE would think that those who are entrusted to report on the facts would FIRST take the time to GET THEM RIGHT…

Now..NEAR as I can tell,, the question here is about WHAT the Flag actually represents.. it SEEMS that THAT depends on WHO you Talk to..So far,,I have seen and heard the SOCV members claim that it is ONLY a part of Southern History and is NOT about Slavery EXCLUSIVELY,, I saw a COUPLE of Blacks that said that it means absolutely NOTHING one way or the Other to them ( I suspect,,NOT the opinion of MANY Blacks) ,, the NAACP claiming it’s unfortunate but WHAT can you do and HERE’S where it gets REALLY INTERRESTING,, a couple of Guilt Ridden WHITE Liberals calling for LAWS against what a PRIVATE Property Owner can DO on his OWN Property..

Now look..I KNOW that this can BE a Hot Button for SOME people with passionate arguments being made on BOTH sides and BOTH sides have EVERY right to MAKE those arguments..PRO or CON,, a VERY understandable positon CAN be made either way..

Personally,, I don’t necessarilly agree that the Symbol of the Confederacy NECESSARILLY stands for Slavery and NOTHING else as I have come to LEARN of the richness of the Southern Heritage in it’s OWN right..

I HAVE to WONDER though,, at those who INSIST that the HERITAGE of UNTOLD numbers of Different FOREIGN Cultures MUST be Respected and "Tolerated" and EVEN Accomadated while ALL vestiges of the Confederacy and it’s CULTURE must be STAMPED out in the NAME of Political Correctness..It WASN’T enough for THEM to have these flags removed from Public Buildings EVEN though the TYPICAL Southern STATE Flag,, UNCHANGED since the Civil War,, could be said to be JUST as Racist and for the SAME reasons.. No,, THEY have to INSIST that ALL must FORGET the existance of a CONSIDERABLE piece of American History altogether..

Well,,,..IF you’re GOING to BE that way,, let’s at LEAST be consistant,, But NO,, it SEEMS to escape the Notice of these SAME White Liberals that there are PUBLIC schools in California Flying the MEXICAN Flag ( ANOTHER culture which at ONE time was at WAR with America ) on AMERICAN Flagpoles OVER an American Flag being displayed UPSIDE DOWN..SOMEHOW,, THAT’S OKAY..And if YOU should HAPPEN to complain about THAT,, these SAME Liberals will be QUICK to remind you that THAT is being Somehow Racist..

The THING of it is,,THIS is HISTORY..NOT just SOUTHERN History but PART of the History of America..EVEN the part dealing with Slavery..The PROBLEM is,,

It SEEMS not so much a matter of remembering that history that has SOME people so upset but WHO it IS that’s remembering it..Like the subject of racism in General..We’re constantly being TOLD that we don’t talk about it enough when the FACT of the matter IS that RACISM is ALL we EVER seem to talk about..

But again,, it ONLY counts when somebody like Wright brings it up and HIS brand of talk is the ONLY acceptable way to DISCUSS racism..It SEEMS that to SOMEpeople,, the ONLY acceptable and qualified authority on the subject of RACISM HAS to BE an African American..

The thing here is that we SHOULD ALL remember that we were ONCE a Nation,,AMONG MANY at the time,, that tolerated slavery JUST as we should ALL remember that we are ALSO a nation that abolished it..

To FORGET that is to risk losing an integral part of OUR History and deminishes us ALL..

But,

What REALLY bothers me here is the suggestion of SOME to PASS Laws against what THEY think is Offensive..I FIND it OFFENSIVE that THEY think that ALL must CATER to their whims but I would NEVER call for LAWS to PUNISH them for it..I am NOT here,,NOR is My Country and Government,, to dance to the whims of those who LOOK for reasons to be offended and the WORST possible scenario is to have MY Government TRAMPLE on the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of others MERELY to APPEASE them…

It is GOOD to discuss these things,, get them OUT in the open,, VOICE your opinions..YOU have THAT right but to THOSE who WISH to quash the Rights of OTHERS which are endowed by OUR Creator and Stipulated IN the Constitution I can ONLY say,,

MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS,, GET A LIFE and LEAVE OUR LIVES,, and OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS,,,ALONE..

From NEWSMAX…..

"With speculation swirling about presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s choice for running mate, a surprising name has popped into the discussion — New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

When McCain had breakfast with Bloomberg recently in Manhattan, a McCain spokesman told the New York Post that "discussing a vice-presidential slot for Bloomberg was not on the agenda."

But a source close to the mayor told John Heilemann of New York magazine that the topic was definitely part of the conversation.

"One of the participants, in fact, came away from the conversation under the distinct impression that Bloomberg is on McCain’s short list," Heilemann wrote.

The Democrat turned Republican turned Independent could aid the McCain campaign in a number of ways come November, according to Heilemann:

• For one thing, billionaire Bloomberg’s entrepreneurial background could serve to counter McCain’s admitted shortcomings regarding economics.
  Republicans are "losing on the economy by 10 to 15 points," said Doug Schoen, Bloomberg’s pollster during his mayoral campaigns. "With Mike on the ticket, that gap would quickly, dramatically close."
• As a Jew, Bloomberg could strengthen McCain in several critical swing states with sizeable Jewish populations, including Florida, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
• Bloomberg would enhance McCain’s image as a moderate,( He’d HAVE to move RIGHT for THAT ) and help distance him from the policies of an unpopular president as Democrats seek to portray the Senator as a George Bush clone, Schoen maintains.

"The Republican brand is dead, at least for this election," Schoen said. "McCain needs to go outside the box, and that’s where Mike lives."

• Perhaps most importantly, Bloomberg could provide McCain with a huge financial boost if he were willing to spend part of his fortune on the campaign.

"Mike Bloomberg spent $83 million in a re-election simply in New York City," New York Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey told an interviewer. If he were the V.P. candidate, the figure would be "between zero and a billion [dollars]."

But there is one eventuality that could torpedo any McCain effort to land Bloomberg as his running mate — an overture to the mayor to run as the vice presidential candidate along with the likely Democratic candidate, Barack Obama.

According to Heilemann, Obama also had breakfast recently with Bloomberg, and even showed him an important economic speech before he delivered it.

A member of Bloomberg’s inner circle said that Bloomberg and Obama reps held a meeting in April, Heilemann reported, "to discuss the former’s suitability to being the latter’s No. 2." "

Is there NO difference whatsoever between the parties anymore????

Once upon a time, STRANGE as it may sound NOW, Jimmy Carter was ONCE the President of the United States.

YOU wouldn’t KNOW it to judge by his actions NOW..

As President, he was given access to a great deal of TOP SECRET information,, both about the U.S. and her Allies,, that he was Honor-Bound,, and POSSIBLY LEGALLY Bound,, to KEEP Secret.

Now, everyone has LONG ASSUMED that Israel had Nuclear Weapons…Assumned but welll,,,,NOBODY ever REALLY knew for SURE..And IF they HAD them,, no one EVER really knew how many,, either… Chances are that the United States government does have a much clearer idea of how many such weapons Israel has,, if ANY,, and,, as Israel is an ally of the US,, it has kept THAT a CLOSE SECRET...

SO,,,,,

What does one do with a FORMER president who, after he leaves office, decides to BETRAY the TRUST that Americans and her Allies placed in him?

And in SO doing,,To BETRAY HIS COUNTRY and it’s ALLIES..

THIS goes FAR beyond ANYTHING that Benidict Arnold ever did..

"Israel has 150 nuclear weapons in its arsenal", former President Jimmy Carter said yesterday, while ARGUING that the US should TALK directly to Iran to persuade it to drop its Nuclear Ambitions.

THIS IS NOT S BID FOR PEACE…

The act of DISCLOSING the number of Nukes that ISRAEL has MERELY Bolstered Iran’s position to DEVELOPE an Arsenal of their own..THAT was CARTER’S real Intent....Once again,,He shows his Preferrences to Terrorist’s Regimes in his Anti- Semetic ferver..

NO,, THIS is NOT a bid for Peace at ALL,, it IS an ACT of Treason,, a HIGH Crime of the HIGHEST order..

This is NOT some Investigative Reporter coming up with these numbers, this is an Ex-president. As such,, they APPEAR to have a decidedly more " inside information" air of credibility behind them…

If a former Israeli Prime Minister would tell a public venue about U.S. military Capabilities and Weaknesses discovered during joint exercises, what would be the US reaction??

If Tony Blair announced the exact location of US Submarines when he was Prime Minister,, or AFTER he left office,, what kind of an uproar would that cause??

Because this is exactly what Jimmy Carter just did to Israel.

He just gave priceless and TOP SECRET information to Iran about Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and ALL but Guarenteed yet ANOTHER serious Confrontation in the Region..

Now,, WHETHER that information was accurate or NOT is beside the point.. What IS the point here is that BY HIS ACT of DISCLOSURE,, Jimmy Carter,, Ex-President of the United States of America,, TRAITOR to TWO Countries,, NOW ranks among such notable names as Kadafi,, Hussein and bin-Ladin as HISTORY’S most POTENT threat to PEACE in the Middle East..

I KNOW that it’s popular to HATE Big Business in this country and the drive to "Get BACK at Them" is becoming stronger and more popular every day..

There is NO stronger an instinct in Human Nature then the INSTINCT to blame ALL our problems on somebody else.. To CREATE a Boogyman and GO after him.. These days it’s ANYTHING having to do with ANY Big Business.. It assuages our sense of ENVY,, our INSISTANCE to surrendering to our Jealosies and gives us a MEANS to vent our Frustrations..

It serves our NEED to NOT take responsibility for our OWN actions,, it’s Guarenteed to garner the support from others of the SAME mentality.. It satisfies our sense of Rightgeous Indignation and LET’S face it,, It’s just PLAIN downright FUN to DO…It FEELS soooo good pointing fingers and getting "it" off our chest.. AND,, and THIS is the BEST part,, It COST nothing to DO it…

But,, DOES it REALLY cost nothing??

I have ALWAYS been of the opinion that the longer the focus of a problem remains set in the wrong direction,, the LONGER that problem remains and that THAT is the most expensive position to be in..

The OIL companies and the politicians have NOTHING to do with the Auto Companies’ continued manufacture of what has been descibed as "Gas Guzzlers"…

I remember when The Japanese came to THIS country with small fuel efficient cars and trucks.. WE wanted NO part of it..WE rejected them out of hand UNTIL there was a supposed Gas crises..THEN we couldn’t get ENOUGH of them…There were YEARS where the Big Three lost millions to the Japanese because THEY refused to change and SO they eventually saw the handwriting on the wall and jumped into the fuel efficient market… The American Companies acually SOLD these Japanese vehicles under THEIR own name..Little Mini-Trucks and cars with Chevy,, Ford and Chrysler plastered all over them and they were reletively successful for a period of time…Buuuut,, THEN guess what happened.. The GAS crunch ended and we ,, ONCE again,, tossed ALL semblence of CARING anything for fuel efficientcy to the curb like a Christmas Tree in February and the AMERICAN People FORCED those Companies to RESUME the manufacture of BIG trucks and Big Cars..

The AMERICAN people,, ONCE again,,Demanded and BOUGHT the SUVs and the Big Cars and Trucks..IF they hadn’t both DEMANDED and Purchased these things,, the Companies wouldn’t be MAKING them.. MANY Americans bought them out of a REFUSAL to buy the Smaller cars and trucks which THEY saw as INFERIOR in most respects,, particularly in the issue of SAFETY and MORE particularly where their families were concerned.. The fact of the matter IS,, EVEN the Japanese, Korean and other foreign companies are manufactring FULL sized Vehicles SOLELY based on,, and in order to SATISFY,, the American DEMAND for them..

The American People DEMANDED these "Gas Guzzlers",, NOT the Oil Companies and NOT the Politicians..And YOU can BET that IF the Gas Crises were to END tomorrow,, the American People would DEMAND them AGAIN..MANY are the things that CAN be blamed on Politics and Corporate Greed but THIS is NOT one of them..

That which is TRUE for the Individual can OFTEN be JUST as TRUE for a Society or a people as a whole..

Be CAREFUL what you WISH for,, you JUST might GET it….

And when you DO,, DON'T blame ANYONE but yourself...